On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Andrew P. Mullhaupt <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/7/2010 1:01 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: >> to, 2010-10-07 kello 12:08 -0400, Andrew P. Mullhaupt kirjoitti: >> [clip] >> But to implement this, you'd have to rewrite large parts of Numpy since >> the separated storage of re/im conflicts with its memory model. > > You wouldn't want to rewrite any of numpy, just add a new class. > >> I believe this will simply not be done, since there seems to be little >> need for such a feature > > No, there is a big need to get the feature in sooner rather than later. > By having this behavior, Python is filtering out a lot of potential > users. So you will not get a lot of complaints - because people will > just walk away and use Matlab, Scilab, or R, etc. Given this behavior > one is strongly tempted to declare everything complex and deprecate the > reals. Unfortunately that is going to run afoul of some things in > subsidiary libraries. > > This idea of "need". What does log(int(2)) return? I guess someone > "needed" that one. But not log(int(-2)). Well, who needs physics and > electrical engineering.
what's your namespace? >>> from scipy import log >>> log(int(-2)) (0.69314718055994529+3.1415926535897931j) Josef > I agree it will not be done, but mainly because people who are in a > position to do it will find an excuse to not do it, not for any better > reason. But it is important to inform everyone that it is not for lack > of a better alternative that we have this problem. It is for lack of > effort. Let's just fess up about why it's not going to be done. > > Best regards, > Andrew Mullhaupt > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
